When fatal fires raged this month in Los Angeles, local officials were forced to solve a lot of lies and lies spreading quickly online.
From the artificial intelligence of the paintings of the notable Hollywood sign surrounded by fire to unfounded rumors, that firefighters used women’s bags full of water to frame flames, disinformation was distributed. While officials in southern California fought with fires and lies, Meta – mother company on Facebook and Instagram – announced He would eliminate his facts checking program in the name of free expression.
Some people wonder what, if anything, state governments can do to stop the spread of harmful lies and rumors that spread in social media. The first respondents are now Experience What election officials had to fight in recent years as lies about electoral fraud – resulting from the refusal of President Donald Trump’s recognition of his loss in 2020 – spread.
One California lawwho passed the party lines last year, requires internet platforms to remove posts with misleading or false content generated by AI related to state elections within 72 hours of the user’s complaint.
The agent allows California politicians and electoral officials harmed the content of the lawsuit and forces compliance. However federal statute It generally protects social media companies from court proceedings, protecting them from recognition for responsibility for content.
“The recent announcement of the finish that they intend to follow the model X relying in the community forum, not experts, shows why the bill was needed and why voluntary commitments are not sufficient,” wrote the democratic assembly of Marc Berman, who introduced this center of Stateline in -Mail.
X, a company previously known as Twitter, defendant California in November, in connection with this, comparing the right to censorship sponsored by the state.
“Instead of allowing the platforms to make their own decisions regarding the moderation of the content of the discussed content here, the government authorizes to replace the judgment to the platform,” wrote the company in the lawsuit.
The thing claims that the law clearly violates the first amendment. Further auditions in the case of the lawsuit will probably come this summer. Berman said he was convinced that the law will win in the courts because he is narrowly adapted to protect the integrity of elections.
The middle of California was the first of its kind in the country. Berman said that depending on how to take place in the courts, he can inspire regulations in other states.
Few state regulations
Distribution of disinformation about fires in Los Angeles, reinforced with algorithms that raise dividing content, shows how media companies cannot and do not deal with this “crisis moment”, said Jonathan Mehta Stein, executive director of California Common Cause, pro-democracy Spokeswoman. He said that countries must do more.
“You do not receive information from the fire brigade or local authorities, unless media companies make sure you do it,” he said in an interview. “Unfortunately, social media companies not only do not do it, but are actively working on the government to do anything with online error and disinformation.”
These two words are sometimes used interchangeably, but “disinformation” concerns false and misleading information, while “disinformation” refers to falsehoods that are deliberately distributed by people who know the information are wrong.
California Common Cause and her California initiative of technology and a project of democracy have helped to create a bill of the Berman Act and are working on promoting similar state provisions throughout the country.
The provisions on disinformation in other states were much more confined. For example, in Colorado last year, democratic legislators legislation This requires the prosecutor general development of resources and nationwide education aimed at preventing the spread of online disinformation. But it is not addressed to companies on social media.
In July, the US Supreme Court hold Regulations in Florida and Texas, which would prevent social networks from prohibiting or limiting content from politicians. Social media companies argued that these provisions violated their protection of the first amendment.
The Act was a response to what republican legislators perceived as anti -conservative prejudice in social companies, especially after Trump was banned on Twitter and Facebook after January 6, 2021, riots in the US Capitol. Judges unanimously agreed that legal issues require further research in the lower courts.
No state right to combat lies came closer to the European Union modelwhich forces social media companies to reduce disinformation and lies on their platforms.
They will also say that Ari Cohn, the main adviser to technology policy at the Foundation for Care Rights and the expressing of Philadelphia, a group of spokesman for freedom of speech at university campus.
“If you have government platforms for removing information only on the basis of falsehood, this is the quintessence of violation of the first amendment,” he said. “It’s just a terrible idea to allow power to determine what the truth is.”
Cohn’s organization, also known as a fire, praised The modern finish approach to checking the facts of the community, saying that it eliminates personal prejudices of checking facts and promotes a more democratic approach to correcting bad information. X extended the employ of a model of social notes in 2022.
Critics argued, however, that the metal decision would deteriorate the disinfection of disinformation and hate speech, and this movement was a glaring political trick of Curry Favor with Trump.
Limited tools to fight disinformation
Without legal roads until the fall of disinformation, officials had to be directly confronted with lies, some even run websites devoted to addressing and improving online gossip. Experts call this practice “initial”.
The news was launched by the facts of Fire California Fire website This shows “lies” about the state’s response to fires along with real information. Among the claims of social media: democratic leaders began fires to hide “pedophile tunnels”; One fire resulted from a satanic ritual; The state wants them to come from outside the statuses. All of these, as noted, are false. And the Federal Crisis Management Agency updates side Previously used during hurricanes to solve gossip.
In addition to officials that counteract online lies, a public model of checking facts is in full bloom, and users send notes to the page that indicate misleading or false information.
For example, when the conservative Dinesh d’Osza provocateur Published On X to 4.7 million observes with the claims that firefighters from Oregon were forced to stop in Sacramento to test emissions, users added a note.
“This information is false and misleading,” a read note, connecting to the official account with Oregon State Fire Marshal.
But the model of community notes is insufficient, said Imran Ahmed, founder and general director of the Digital Center Center Digital, a non -profit organization, which is in favor of civic freedoms online.
In October, it published the Center test It was stated that 74% of banknotes that improve the disinformation of the US elections are never shown to users. In addition, posts with false information had 13 times more views than the community itself.
“He is based on the good will of users,” said Ahmed in an interview. “Of course, the behavior of some people leading these platforms shows that there is often no good will, that these are not environment in which people try to create the truth.”
When natural disasters, such as Los Angeles fires, they act as wrestling points in disinformation, and community notes programs are not effective enough in combating lies, said Peter Adams, Senior Vice President of Research and Design in the design of the news news ” Behind the countries receiving reading and writing skills programs.
The organization runs a digital Rumorguard tool that informs subscribers when there is a widespread disinformation on a specific topic. Group released Alert January 9, two days after the outbreak of fire Palisades.
“People, even more than before, must be their own guards, proven facts and editors when it comes to an information diet,” said Adams.
Berman, a Democratic California Congregation, agrees. He said that disinformation on natural disasters can have perilous consequences in the real world and mislead people in their most sensitive moments.
In 2023, the bill was successfully sat down to add a media wind to the K-12 curriculum, joining several states which have introduced similar regulations in recent years.
Recently, Berman said, a close friend who lives in the Pacific Palisades community, told him about false information disseminating in his social circles. Berman encouraged his friend to always ask himself: “Who, who is making posts?” And “What are their motives for what they publish?”
“He joked that he could take advantage of training in the media,” Berman We -Mail reminded Stateline. “But the truth is that we could all.”
